Writings

A young girl carrying a teddy bear and waving a white flag, heads towards an army outpost in the Samah neighbourhood on the eastern outskirts of Mosul, away from the heavy fighting engulfing the city. Photo: UNHCR/Ivor Prickett

The Battle of Mosul that began last October is becoming increasingly deadly for the civilians still trapped in the city. Recent reports of civilian casulaties have led to questions about the level of scrutiny potential targets are given before being attacked. Further afield, the growing death toll also raises questions about criminal accountability for these civilian deaths — both now and in the future.

A member of the court since 2003, there is ample evidence that serious crimes have been committed in Afghanistan by all sides of the conflict. But the prospect of opening a formal investigation there also means that US forces and officials could come under scrutiny by the ICC, a development that could have major ramifications for the court.

It is understandable that policymakers would want to clamp down on drug use within the country. But after campaigning for tough reforms, the approach that Duterte and his government is taking has shocked people both inside and outside the country.

Yesterday saw the trial of Ahmad al-Faqi al-Mahdi at the International Criminal Court for the intentional destruction of world heritage shrines in Timbuktu during the 2012 occupation of the city by the Islamic rebel group Ansar Dine. The trial marks two important milestones for the court: this is the first time a suspect plead guilty, and also the first case of cultural destruction as a war crime.

More than 20 years after the Bosnian war ended, the International Criminal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) convicted Radovan Karadžić on 10 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the customs of war. There are hopes that the verdict will serve as an important step for Bosnians to move on from a war that ended more than two decades ago.

Today the International Criminal Court reached an historic decision, finding former Congolese vice president Jean-Pierre Bemba guilty of murder, rape and pillaging. This verdict marks the first ICC conviction for rape and gender based violence.

The decades old system of international laws and agreements intended to facilitate the safe and dignified processing of refugees is now clearly broken. Unless the international community substantially updates these policies to reflect the realities of the 21st century, the old system is bound to fold under the pressure.

Gruesome beheading videos and online calls to join the caliphate have become hallmarks of the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham, intimidating its enemies and fuelling recruitment efforts. But the Western jihadis whose social media savvy has helped launch ISIS into the global spotlight could one day find themselves facing justice in the International Criminal Court thanks to a legal backdoor that would see their tweets and Facebook posts used against them.

News broke this week of the surrender of Dominic Ongwen, a top commander in the Lord’s Resistance Army, to US forces in the Central African Republic. One of the five LRA commanders indicted by the ICC in 2005, Ongwen is also the most controversial of the Uganda indictments. While his surrender deals a serious blow to the LRA, whether the LRA’s victims will see justice remains unclear. Ongwen was a child when he was abducted by the LRA and grew up to become a notorious killer. But what are the legal and moral implications of trying a man for crimes against humanity when that man was conscripted as a child?

It has been a rough month for the International Criminal Court. A week after deciding to withdraw the charges in the high profile case of Uhuru Kenyatta, the ICC’s Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda appeared before the UN Security Council to inform them that the court will be suspending investigations into atrocities committed in Darfur due to a lack of cooperation by the Sudanese government, ICC member states and the UN.